A defense attorney for one Tiananmen Vigilante Activist has asked a Hong Kong court not to “pay lip service” to human rights protections, arguing that calls to end one-party rule in China should be considered legitimate political expression.
Lawyer Erik Shum, representing Lee Cheuk-yan, spoke before a three-judge panel on Monday as closing arguments began in the national security trial of Lee and Chow Hang-tung. Both are former leaders of the now defunct Hong Kong Alliance in Support of China’s Patriotic Democratic Movements.
The pair and the Alliance are facing a charge of “inciting subversion,” an offense under a Beijing-imposed national security law, over the group’s calls to end decades of one-party rule in China during candlelight vigils commemorating the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown. That offense carries a maximum sentence of 10 years behind bars.
Calls to end one-party rule — one of the group’s five principles that also included China’s democratization since its founding in 1989 — called for a change in the country’s political system rather than targeting any specific political party, Shum said.
Shum told the court on Monday that prosecutors had not presented evidence that the Alliance sought to incite the public to revolt against the ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
The alliance had never proposed an “action plan” to mobilize supporters to topple the CCP, he added.
“In the past 30 years, there has been no evidence to show that any person acted on specific instructions from the Alliance,” Shum said in Cantonese.
Civil political criticism
Prosecutors have argued that there is no “legal means” to end the PKK’s rule after a 2018 constitutional amendment stipulates that party leadership is the “defining feature” of China’s socialist system.
Shum argued Monday that prosecutors presented a “tautological theory.”
“We ask: How exactly did the Alliance incite others to overthrow the PKK? And my submission is that the prosecution has always returned to the claim that ending the rule of the KPK is illegal,” Shum said.
Shum asked the court to set a boundary for what is considered acceptable political expression and what is not.
“The court should not pay attention to the protection of human rights,” he said.
Judge Alex Lee, one of three national security judges presiding over the trial, asked Shum to elaborate on how higher courts have interpreted illegal means in historical case “Hong Kong 47”.in which 45 pro-democracy activists were found guilty of subversion.
Shum argued that the case revolved around the group’s plan to indiscriminately veto the government’s budget after they were elected as lawmakers, which was deemed a breach of duty and abuse of power.
The alliance, however, was not exercising any power and its calls should be considered civil political criticism, Shum said.
“On this side of the spectrum is dissatisfaction with the status quo. Is that not allowed to be said?” he said.
“Freedom is not absolute”
Also giving closing arguments on Monday, Chief Prosecutor Ned Lai said the Alliance’s calls should be interpreted as an overthrow of China’s “fundamental system” and the country’s central political bodies.
Lai argued that the Alliance’s calls had exceeded the legitimate limit of freedom of expression as the defendants intended to incite hatred against Beijing.
“We say their behavior crossed the line,” he said in Cantonese. “Freedom is not absolute.”
The prosecutor also said that the defendants’ defense of democratization was irrelevant to the case since their calls constituted a violation of the law.
Judge Lee was skeptical of Lai’s submission, saying the court may have to consider whether the defendants “genuinely believed” their conduct was lawful.
Chow, a lawyer representing herself in the trial, is set to give her closing arguments on Tuesday.
For decades, the Alliance has organized vigils in Victoria Park to commemorate the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown in Beijing, when hundreds, possibly thousands, were killed as troops dispersed pro-democracy demonstrators in and around Tiananmen Square.
The alliance dissolved in 2021 after authorities suspended vigilance for two years, citing Covid-19 restrictions, and arrested its leadership on national security charges. Chow and Lee have been behind bars since September 2021.
A third defendant, former lawmaker Albert Ho, was barred from the rest of the proceedings after pleading guilty when the trial opened in January.
